Get Order

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds value by specifying what data is returned (line items, fulfillments, customer info) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, or handling of missing orders. This meets the lower bar for annotation-backed tools but lacks rich behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose and key outputs. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only getter with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description sufficiently indicates return contents. It does not need to explain return structure since no output schema exists, but it gives enough context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. The sibling context (mutations, list tools) reinforces its role.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all three parameters (store, id, response_format) already documented. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond 'specific order', so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific order'), and enumerates included content (line items, fulfillments, customer info). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like order_list (which lists orders) and order_fulfill (which mutates).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context that this tool is for fetching a single order's details, implying use when a specific order_id is known. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is unambiguous for a getter tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.